More on Obama and Abortion: A Call for Consistency

In an interview with Relevant Magazine, Barack Obama said, “I think it’s entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother.” I would whole-heartedly agree. It is appropriate. More than appropriate, I believe its morally imperative that States prohibit late-term abortions. I think we see a massively glaring inconsistency in Obama’s stance on abortion here. Let me explain:

Obama indicates here that it is appropriate for states to restrict late-term abortions. So the obvious question arises–why late-term abortions but not early-term or mid-term abortions? If there is something morally suspect about late-term abortions, shouldn’t that tell us something about abortion itself? What makes people so uncomfortable with late-term abortions is the fact that the baby in the womb looks like . . . a baby. The later into a pregnancy that an abortion is conducted, the more violent the procedure appears and the more obvious it is that what is being aborted is in fact human! That is why planned parenthood scoffs at initiatives to show mothers an ultrasound before performing an abortion. If you don’t look at what you are aborting, maybe we can pretend its not human.

If it is wrong to perform an abortion late into a pregnancy, why isn’t it wrong to perform one earlier? This is a huge inconsistency and I think reveals that Obama’s stance on abortion is politically polished but as Kevin has aptly pointed out is radically pro-choice. How developed does a baby have to be to justify aborting it? At what point does it become morally suspect as Obama apparently concedes to? How can Obama claim that it is appropriate for states to prohibit late-term abortions and still vote against the ban on partial-birth abortion?

If we concede that an embryo is human life in its earliest stages then we must say that abortion at any stage in a pregnancy is murder. Obama’s statement here on late-term abortions reveals, I think a sense that there is something wrong with aborting what appears to be human–probably because deep down we know that it is in fact human and abortion at any stage is murder.

Wow, those are some powerful pictures. Obama, does claim to support States who wish to prohibit late-term abortions though. My point, in this post was that it doesn’t matter when an abortion is committed–late or early its still abortion and its still murder.

My point was that Obama is not consistent–if you will hold out that there is something wrong with late term abortions, why not take the next logical step and say that abortion is prima face–murder?

[…] Playstation 3 and on how Barak Obama is NOT the antichrist alongside very conservative posts on abortion and marriage. So say what you want about me, call me a fundamentalist or a legalist, but as I have […]

I find it sad that someone who claims to stand for change and prosperity would root for something like that! Anyone human being with feelings has to die inside when seeing or knowing that something like that even happens.

I agree Clinton. I think that most people who are pro-choice have simply decieved themselves into thinking that abortion is something other than murder, that somehow a woman has more right over her body than the living human being inside her has the right to live.

What concerns me is that if you take that kind of thinking to its logical conclusion, who has the right to life at all? If I can choose to take the life of my unborn child then why not extend that born children? If that sounds absurd, why doesn’t abortion sound absurd?

Your comment doesn’t make any sense. Are you upset at something I said? You will have to explain more.

I encourage people to interact with my arguments, show me where I am wrong–if you just say you are offended, no one is helped. It is a scare tactic–shocking someone with being offended doesn’t prove anything.